| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document Title | Presentation: Cumulative 3ms Not Consistent in R129 | ||||||||
| Reference Number | CRS-54-05 | ||||||||
| Date |
28 Oct 2015
|
||||||||
| Summary | Presentation to highlight inconsistencies in the lateral and forward cumulative head and chest acceleration injury criteria (determination of the maximum acceleration with a cumulative duration of at least 3ms). | ||||||||
| Source(s) | Tass | ||||||||
| Rulemaking Area(s) | UN R129 Enhanced Child Restraints | ||||||||
| Meeting(s) | |||||||||
| Downloads | |||||||||
| UNECE server | .pdf format | ||||||||
| Excerpts from session reports related to this document | |||||||||
| CRS | Session 54 | 27 Oct 2015 |
show and explain difference between γ(3ms) cumulatively & γ(3ms) continually. According to Farid BENDJELLAL (BRITAX) , it’s not clear in the current R129 regulation. It’s different in the R44 regulation because it’s defines 3ms “exceedance”. For Tommy PETTERSSON (VTI), we do not have to change the current R44 regulation. Pierre CASTAING (UTAC & chairman) agree to make modification for γ(3ms) cumulatively for phase I in chapter 8.1 and Annex 17. Erik SALTERS (DOREL): we can add something like “Align R129 to R44 by improving definition of R129. |
||||||||